Re: what to revert
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: what to revert |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYT39N65fxqoTuEnYdEdst-KDTC9RBm2nshQ2VMiMmshA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: what to revert (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: >> > but that might be fixed now. >> >> Certainly all evidence suggests that, FUD to the contrary. > > So it's now FUD to report issues with a patch that obviously hasn't > received sufficient benchmarking? Give me break. Yeah, I don't think that's FUD. Kevin, since your last fix, we don't have a round of benchmarking on a big machine to show whether that fixed the issue or not. I think that to really know whether this is fixed, somebody would need to compare current master with current master after reverting snapshot too old on a big machine and see if there's a difference. If anyone has done that, they have not posted the results. So it's more accurate to say that we just don't know. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: